Skip to main content
back to forum topic



A proposal has been made by a candidate on the member slate that has been the topic of discussion in other forums here. CIRA has published responses earlier today with their reasons why they do not think it is appropriate.

May I ask which candidates are for or against this and their reasoning? 

While I am not opposed to the principle of “sunshine lists” and the transparency that they afford, I feel that organizations need to tread lightly when revealing information regarding compensation, particularly from a privacy standpoint.  I personally do not feel that the candidates have had ample time to properly digest this.  At this point, I will be voting against it, particularly since any vote for it is non-binding making it a somewhat moot issue.

It is not moot as any Board should respect the wishes of its members or it resigns if it cannot do so in fair conscience.  That is good governance.

Law sets a minimal standard.   Good governance sets a higher standard.  Ethics is sometimes defined by what you do when no one is watching  - what you should do rather than what you can do.   

I will save my powder for tomorrow.    

I did not receive the member proposal, but here's my opinion: 

A publicly listed corporation is obliged to list the salaries of its CEO, CFO and 3 next most highly compensated officers. As a former executive at a 100% self-funding not-for-profit regulatory authority in BC, we published annually all of the components of board compensation and the compensation components of the 5 most highly paid executives. I personally would have been fine with the salaries of all senior executives being disclosed. As our customers had no option but to use our services to conduct certain transactions due to our monopolistic nature, we felt we owed them and our stakeholders that transparency. I am not keen on listing the salaries of non-senior executives, however. -Liza Aboud